Jump to content

Yosharian

Members
  • Content Count

    1,281
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Yosharian

  1. Ok, I'll go with Dwarf then. I have a question, when it comes to determining the Athletics bonus for Contendor's Armor, do points from teammates' Athletics scores count towards that?
  2. Can you recommend a different race? I was considering Dwarf or Human. Constitution affliction resistance seems useful, and the accuracy/defense bonus of Human seems useful too.
  3. I see, I'll check out Contendor's Armor. I'm using Gift Bearer's Cloth on another character. I don't really see what other Cloaks would be suitable. Bonus Stride doesn't seem that useful. And if I'm using Contendor's Armor then I'm maxing Athletics I guess. I have taken a few too many actives, I guess. I'm not sure which ones to ditch though. I did consider Helm of the White Void actually.
  4. Thanks for the response Boeroer. So I don't have those items equipped because I'm using them on other characters. Offensive Parry is taken purely for the Deflection boost, since I already have very low recovery from Miscreant's Leathers + Armored Grace. Nomad's Brigandine is too much recovery for this build in my opinion, since a lot of these spells have 3 or 4 second recovery times. Also, the build isn't meant to be the main tank, only off tank. I have Charge and other abilities to help get out of sticky situations when needed. "provoke 100% Offensive Parries (which generate foc
  5. So are so few builds on this list that it's laughable. That's not a criticism of the list, though, rather its damning evidence that there is little to no interest in making builds for this game.
  6. I hate pre-made modules. They don't match my standards for what constitutes a fleshed out game.
  7. Plus if you follow this guide but stay silent for some of the options then you don't get what the guide lists
  8. Yes, but ALSO in those games, a Fighter with 12 Str and one with 19, both have the same strength when they equip a Belt of Storm Giant Strength.
  9. Favourite improvement: AI management system Biggest step back: 'no bad builds' attribute system
  10. But it's not, because apparently your attributes don't even matter as far as role-playing goes? Quote: "PoE's´╗┐attribute system is a battle system, not RPG system."
  11. If you're looking for a more advanced respec than the one the taverns give you, check out the Unity Console mod, which gives you complete control over companion (sub)classes, abilities, attributes, etc. Also there are some respec mods.
  12. Oh, well if your argument is that 3 in Pillars is equivalent to 7 in Pathfinder then yes, I concede that that's entirely reasonable. That's one of the things I mentioned in the post. Or, I thought I did. But yes, that's reasonable, if that's what 3 means. I'm just not certain that that's what it means. I'm going through Josh's GDC talk now. I'm sure he mentioned something specific about this. Edit: ok so actually at the moment he references a Perception of 3, he only says 'that's the lowest it can be', he doesn't go into detail about what that 3 actually means. I updated my
  13. > This makes min-maxing possible. This assumes that you can't min-max if such very low values are unavailable. If the minimum for a given attribute is 7, I can still min-max, just within a smaller (more sensible) range. I agree that in strict role-playing, a value of 7 is really quite challenging to role-play. That's why I think 7 is a great number to restrict players to. It still presents challenging role-play opportunities for those that seek it, and it allows min-maxers to do their thing. But it isn't absurd, actually-impossible-to-role-play like a value of 3 is. >
  14. A character that is crippled is literally incapable of doing the things your character does in Pillars & Deadfire. In this case your argument can be reduced to 'the numbers can mean anything you want', which doesn't seem to be a very good role-playing system to me. I'm not arguing for the 'removal of fixed boundaries'.
  15. TL;DR: other role-playing games and role-playing systems restrict their characters to reasonable attributes when creating a character, for example having lower limits of 7 points for a given attribute. Should games like Pillars of Eternity also have such restrictions, in order to promote role-playing and prevent absurd ludonarrative dissonance? Or is it perfectly fine and desirable for players to be able to create characters with the intelligence of a brick? A Short Preface I've been playing Pathfinder Kingmaker recently, and noticed that in character creation, you are limited to a
  16. It's a little presumptuous to say that something is unnecessary because you don't like it. It's not clear at all what percentage of Deadfire players, or the general gaming populace, is interested in turn-based, so it's also just speculation to say 'very few' of the playerbase is interested in it. For example, I have been vocal about my dislike of Deadfire's voiceover narration, and frequently made requests to have the option to turn it off in the options. I know I'm not alone in this. However, I would never dream of asking for it to be removed for future games, because if others enjoy
  17. Ultimately, this discussion is not worth continuing because a lot of the elements being discussed are down to personal taste. What elements can be delved into in a more objective manner are also not getting us anywhere because we both have very different ideas on how they work, and it's not clear at all who is correct on each point, from a neutral perspective. While I'm willing to say 'well, we disagree on this, so I'm not going to debate further on it because it's a waste of time for both of us', you can't respect that, instead seeing it as a victory that one person in a discussion decides
  18. Freaking. Awesome. Both of them. **** dude, my Watcher just got a whole lot more bad-ass.
×
×
  • Create New...